An apple a day: Keith’s technology blog

Magic Trackpad: multitouch comes to the desktop

Fri, 30 Jul 2010 14:42:49 +0100

Last week, alongside revamped iMac and Mac Pros, Apple released its long rumoured Magic Trackpad device. The device (pictured above) is a wireless multitouch controller, similar to those that Apple ships with its laptops, but designed for connecting to a desktop computer (although it also works with laptops). As far as I know, the device is OS X only at present, although Apple ships drivers for use with its Windows ‘Boot Camp’ software, allowing you to use the trackpad when booting into either OS X or Windows on your Mac.

The Magic Trackpad connects via Bluetooth and so has an operating range of up to 10m. This means that there are no wires, reducing desktop clutter. The device itself is powered by two AA size batteries (supplied). Apple also released its own battery charger, which claims to be the most power-efficient in its class, although I can’t vouch for that as I already have a suitable charger and so decided not to opt for the Apple model.

Even compared to the trackpads on recent MacBooks, the Magic Trackpad is relatively large. However, unlike a mouse, you don’t need to move it around so it still takes up less space on your desktop. The unit can be placed on the left or right side of your keyboard as required and so is suitable for left- or right-handed use. The styling and dimensions match those of the Apple wireless keyboard, so the two look pretty swish when placed side by side.

The initial setup procedure for the trackpad was a little fiddly. I first had to pair the computer and trackpad via Bluetooth Preferences and then download a Software Update to enable the multitouch functionality. Without the update it functioned like a basic trackpad, though with some oddities, like not being able to drag while pressing (more about that later). This wasn’t a problem with the update installed, however, and the procedure will presumably become much smoother after the next operating system release, when the drivers will presumably be installed by default.

Once installed, the trackpad worked like a dream and enables a wide range of multitouch gestures for everything from basic clicking and dragging to zooming in and out, rotating images and switching between applications. You can enabled or disable the various gestures via the Trackpad preferences pane, accessible via System Preferences on the Apple menu. Each option helpfully includes a short video clip showing you how to perform the gesture to help you get started.

In practice, the default settings work well enough, though some useful variations can be enabled via Preferences (notably dragging and tap to click). The complete set of available gestures is as follows:

• Tap to click
• Dragging (double tap and hold, move, then tap again to release)
• Drag lock (not sure what difference this makes)
• Secondary click (tap bottom-left or bottom-right corner)
• 360º scroll (two finger swipe, with or without inertia)
• Rotate (two finger pivot gesture)
• Enlarge/reduce (pinch open or closed)
• Screen zoom (two finger swipe with Control or other key held down)
• Secondary tap (two finger tap)
• Navigate left/right/up/down* (three finger swipe)
• Three finger dragging*
• Exposé (four finger swipe up/down)
• Application switcher (four finger swipe left/right)

With the exception of dragging, most of these are easy to get the hang of. Tap to click is not enabled by default because, as with Apple’s recent laptops, the entire trackpad functions as one large button. Rather cleverly, the Apple designers have concealed a microswitch in the base of the unit that is activated by pressure upon either of the two rubber feet. Consequently, pressing anywhere on the trackpad generates a satisfying audible and tactile click. Despite this, I still prefer to use the tap to click option, which is much quieter, although it’s nice to have the choice (especially when it comes to dragging, as described below).

You can drag select or drag and drop items using the Magic Trackpad in one of three ways. First, just press to click and move your finger around while the button is held down. This method only works for short distances since as soon as your finger reaches the edge of the trackpad you have to let go, releasing the dragged item (actually, you can continue dragging with a different finger if you like, but this is a little fiddly and not very intuitive).

The second method of dragging uses a double tap and hold gesture and has the advantage of supporting multiple movements before tapping for a third time to release. Alternatively, you can enable three-finger dragging via System Preferences, although you then lose the ability to use this gesture to navigate. It’s a pity that Mac OS X isn’t smart enough to automatically select the right action depending on the context so that you can get the best of both worlds, but perhaps this will be in OS X 10.7.

In practice, you can use a mixture of all three gestures with press to drag items for short distances and double-tap or three-finger drags for longer distances. (It should be pointed out that clicking and dragging for long distances isn’t that easy with a mouse either as you sometimes have to pick the mouse up and relocate it on the desk to continue the movement – something that isn’t always possible with Apple’s mouse designs.)

In general, I found the Magic Trackpad gestures to be very intuitive, and much nicer to use than a mouse. Having the freedom to scroll, rotate and navigate, as well as the ability trigger Exposé and switch applications, is a real time saver, and something I always missed when using my iMac as compared to a MacBook. Now I can have the best of both worlds.

As a long time RSI sufferer, I am also finding the trackpad much more comfortable to use than a mouse. I was previously using a Kensington trackball, which is easier on the wrists than a mouse but doesn’t support the same number of operations, meaning that I had to move the cursor around or switch between trackball and keyboard more often. Needless to say, this is not ideal, and the Magic Trackpad is proving to be a much better solution.

Perhaps the most exciting aspect of new Apple’s input controller is its potential for use in first- and third-party applications. You can easily imagine the Magic Trackpad being used as a games controller or in the next version of Apple’s iWork and iLife software to perform various advanced functions, as demonstrated by the recently released iWork apps for the iPad. It seems likely that Apple will increasingly push the use of multitouch as a key differentiator for the Mac platform, paving the way for the transition into a fully touch based user interface. In the meantime, expect to see some interesting innovations in the next major release of the Mac operating system to support this and other touch based input devices, such as the Magic Mouse.

To sum up, the Magic Trackpad is an excellent and innovative addition to any desktop Mac, though you will need to be running OS X 10.6.4 or above to take advantage of it. I can safely say that my existing mouse and trackball will be going back into the cupboard and not coming out again for some time. This is not just a replacement for a mouse, it’s an improvement upon it, and I look forward to seeing more support for multitouch gestures in all my favourite desktop apps, starting with iWork later this year. Highly recommended!

iPhone 4 reception and the ‘death grip’

Thu, 15 Jul 2010 21:19:39 +0100

Apple has been getting a lot of bad press recently due to an apparent flaw in the iPhone 4’s mobile antenna which can cause the phone’s reception to drop off when held in a certain way. As an iPhone 4 owner myself, here is my take on the problem, its causes and what Apple needs to do to address the issue.

The ‘Death Grip’

First off, the symptoms. The new iPhone 4 design (above) incorporates a stainless steel band around the circumference of the phone which doubles up as the phone’s wireless antenna. In fact, this band is divided into three separate sections, including two independent antennas. The top-right section acts as the cellphone antenna with the top-left section being the combined Wi-Fi, Bluetooth and GPS antenna. The bottom part of the phone is not part of the antenna.

This design has the advantage of removing any barriers between the antenna and the incoming signal that can affect reception, as was alleged to be the case with the original iPhone and, to a lesser extent, iPhone 3G and 3GS, all of which feature internal antennas. The disadvantage is that you make physical contact with the antennas simply by holding the phone in your hand, which can also affect reception.

This is not necessarily a problem in itself, since reception could theoretically given that your body effectively becomes part of the antenna. (Don’t worry – there’s no current passing through it and so no chance of getting an electric shock!) Unfortunately, however, there is a particular spot near the bottom-left corner of the iPhone’s casing where the Wi-Fi antenna and base section meet (the horizontal black line in the above picture) which, when covered by a finger or hand, causes the iPhone 4 to lose signal strength. In extreme cases, this can lead to a dropped call or reduced data rates, or switching from a 3G to GPRS signal.

The most obvious manifestation of this problem is a reduction in the number of signal bars shown on the phone’s display. Since signal strength is averaged out over time, the signal appears to progressively reduce, sometimes to almost nothing, although the effect is presumably instant. This has led to the problem being dubbed the ‘death grip’, since holding the phone in this particular way appears to ‘kill’ your reception (although this appearance is somewhat deceptive, as described below).

In my experience, the problem is relatively easy to reproduce. It occurs whenever signal strength is relatively weak and you hold the phone in a way that bridges the gap between the left-hand and bottom sections of the casing. This typically happens when you hold the iPhone in the palm of your left hand, which is common for most right-handed users (not left-handers, as reported in the press), resulting in a weaker signal. A few unscientific tests in my back garden resulted in a 50% reduction in data transfer rate when the phone is held in this way, making it a fairly significant issue.

How to Avoid the Problem

There are two obvious ways in which you can avoid the problem. First, you can simply hold the phone differently. In practice, this means gripping the phone by the edges instead of allowing it to rest in your palm. This is by no means uncomfortable and is quite natural given the iPhone 4’s squared-off design, but hardly ideal for a device designed for mobile communication.

The second is to buy one of the many wraparound cases that are available from Apple and third-party vendors, which effectively insulate your hand from the antenna, thus fixing the problem. Given that most people prefer to use their iPhone in some form of case anyway, this is a very practical way of solving the issue, but somewhat embarrassing to Apple, who market the iPhone as a premium cost mobile device, not to mention being an additional cost to the consumer who has every right to expect their phone to work perfectly right out of the box.

These two ‘solutions’ formed the basis of Apple’s initial response to the problem, which was effectively to deny that it was a serious issue. However, whilst this avoids the immediate issue, it can hardly be described as a satisfactory fix for what is clearly a significant flaw in the iPhone’s hardware or software design. And as design flaws go, this one’s a real humdinger.

A number of points are worthy of note. First, the issue only occurs when the join between the Wi-Fi antenna and bottom casing is bridged, not between the cellphone antenna and the case. This is strange since it is the latter that is responsible for mobile reception. Interestingly, the iPhone 4’s Wi-Fi reception actually seems to improve when you pick it up, suggesting that the problem may not be entirely due to the cellphone antenna design but could be some kind of electrical or internal interference issue.

The second is that there is evidence that overall reception has improved with the iPhone 4 as compared to previous iPhones, resulting in fewer dropped calls and ‘dead zones’ where it is impossible to get a signal. I can’t confirm this myself since I switched carriers from O2 to Orange when I got my iPhone 4, but the reception in my basement flat is certainly considerably better than it was with O2, although this could well be due to differences in carrier signal strength rather than the phone.

Lastly, it is far from clear that the ‘death grip’ issue is a hardware problem rather than a software issue. All mobile phones are affected by interference generated by large objects, including the human body, and newer models are programmed to dynamically switch between transmission frequencies in order to avoid this. If the iPhone 4’s software were failing to do this correctly, or were switching to an incorrect frequency, this would result in exactly the sort of problems that are observed. Coupled with the fact that it is the Wi-Fi antenna, not the cellphone antenna, that seems to be causing this problem, a software fix seems like a distinct, if somewhat optimistic, possibility.

Calibrating Signal Strength

The ‘death grip’ issue is compounded by the fact that the iPhone (including previous models) display an somewhat exaggerated indication of signal strength. This distortion was no doubt introduced by Apple to gloss over early problems with the original iPhone, which was rumoured to have poor reception. Apple have since expressed ‘surprise’ that this is the case, prompting them to release a minor update to the iPhone’s operating system (iOS 4.0.1) to resolve this cosmetic issue.

This effectively made the phone appear more sensitive to variations in signal strength than it actually is, since not all of the bars represent the same difference in signal. The difference between 4 and 5 bars, for example, was substantially greater than the difference between 1 and 2 bars (this has since been fixed in the update). Whilst this has no doubt contributed to the widespread perception that holding the iPhone in a certain way ‘kills’ reception, it cannot explain the dropped calls or reduced data transfer rate, and so cannot be the entire cause of the problem.

It turns out that calibrating the signal quality of a mobile device is surprisingly difficult, with the signal bars displayed on most mobile phones bearing remarkably little relation to their ability to make and receive calls. Provided that you’ve got at least some signal, it should be possible to initiate and maintain calls and a reasonable transfer rate. Reduction in actual performance only becomes apparent when the signal is very weak; e.g. 1 bar or less. Signal bar indicators therefore only give a rough indication of how strong the signal is in your area, but not of signal quality, which is what would cause the phone to drop calls or data. This is as true of the iPhone as any other phone, so one should be careful of reading too much into the on-screen indication of signal strength which is a poor (albeit useful) guide to performance.

The Bottom Line

So, is the so-called ‘death grip’ a big deal or not? Well, if you’re one of the large proportion of users who feels more comfortable keeping their expensive smartphone in a case (which is probably a good idea anyway to prevent accidental damage), I’d say not as the issue simply won’t affect you. Alternatively, if you don’t mind holding the iPhone somewhat gingerly between forefinger and thumb (this isn’t as bad as it sounds given the shape of the phone, which is otherwise a marvel of design and technology), this problem is more than compensated for by other improvements in the iPhone 4 – not least of which is its increased sensitivity in case of a weak signal.

There is, however, undoubtedly a serious flaw in the iPhone’s hardware or software that Apple will need to address if it is to regain consumer confidence. Microsoft executives are already suggesting that the iPhone 4 could be “Apple’s Vista” in the sense of being a PR disaster that could undermine confidence in their products. For a company whose brand name is all important, this could be devastating, and Apple will need to move fast in order to avoid further damage to its reputation – not to mention appeasing millions of early adopters who, like myself, have already bought the phone.

Perhaps the most surprising aspect of all this is that Apple appeared to be unaware of (or at least unprepared for) this problem at the time of the iPhone’s release. This may be partly due to the high levels of secrecy that the company insists upon, meaning that test units were kept in protective cases at all times in order to avoid being spotted (a strategy that proved ineffective when a tester accidentally left his iPhone 4 in a bar). Since the problem only arises when the user makes direct contact with the phone’s outer casing, the use of such cases would have effectively masked the problem. Even so, it is hard to imagine that Apple had no idea about this flaw beforehand, and so should have been better prepared to deal with it.

Potential remedies range from a simple software fix (the recently released iOS 4.0.1 only fixes the cosmetic issue with the way that signal strength is displayed, but doesn’t remove the real cause of the problem) to a recall of all iPhone 4s for repair or replacement. This would undoubtedly cost the company hundreds of millions, if not billions, of dollars, and is in my view quite unlikely.

My suspicion is that Apple will opt for something in between with a voluntary repair programme for those most concerned by the issue, and a hardware fix for all iPhones manufactured from now on. Indeed, there are signs that this may already be happening. Whatever their response, however, we should know by this time tomorrow as Apple have called a press conference to make a statement on the problem. Let’s hope that they have found a solution and don’t try and fob us off by telling us how best to hold the phone.

Having said that, I’m still quite happy with my iPhone and, whilst I would prefer Apple to fix the issue outright, I would rather have an imperfect iPhone 4 than any of the other smartphone models currently available. Others may of course feel differently and vote with their feet or, more to the point, their wallets.

Inside iOS 4.0

Sun, 4 Jul 2010 00:19:12 +0100

Following on from my previous post on the iPhone 4, I now want to highlight a few of the new features in the latest version of the iPhone’s operating system, known as iOS 4.

The ‘iOS’ moniker marks a change from previous versions of the operating system (formerly known as ‘iPhone OS’) to reflect the fact that it is used by other devices than the iPhone – namely the iPad and iPod touch. There are rumours that Apple may soon extend the range to include an update or replacement for their Apple TV product, and even incorporating iOS into the next version of the Mac operating system, OS X. Indeed, a rebranding of OS X under the new iOS banner seems likely for strategic and marketing reasons, even if the change turns out to be largely cosmetic. (iOS and OS X already share a substantial common core, as does Apple’s OS X Server product, which is an expanded version of Mac OS X designed for business and professional use.)

Naming aside, however, iOS 4 represents a substantial revision to iPhone OS 3, incorporating both new user-facing features, such as folders, multitasking and FaceTime video calls, plus additional behind-the-scenes improvements like improved support for multicore processors, programming idioms and the latest LLVM compiler technology, which can improve performance of iOS 4 apps by up to 33%. In this post I will concentrate on the three main user facing features, starting with perhaps the simplest but most useful additions to iOS 4: the ability to organise your apps into folders.

Folders

The runaway success of Apple’s App Store has meant that many iPhone and iPod touch users have accumulated dozens, if not hundreds, of apps on their iOS devices. This makes organising and locating apps something of a nightmare (although you can always use Spotlight to launch an app by typing its name). To remedy this situation, iOS 4 allows individual collections of apps to be created by dragging one icon on top of another to make a folder. iOS even cleverly names the new folder according to the type of apps you are grouping – Games, Reference, Productivity, and so on – based on information already downloaded from the App Store.

In practice, this feature works extremely well, and is one of the best thought out aspects of iOS 4’s user interface. I was able to quickly and easily to organise six pages of apps down to just two, including a handful of folders for less frequently used apps. Tapping a folder icon opens it up to show the contents, enabling you to select the app you want. Tapping it for a second time or elsewhere on the display closes it again. Removing or renaming folders is similarly effortless and you can even add folders to the dock at the bottom of the screen (though curiously you can’t create them there in the first place). To help you remember what’s in it, each folder also displays a handy miniature version of the first nine apps that in it – something that looks particularly impressive on the iPhone 4’s high density Retina display.

Whilst the metaphor of files and folders is familiar to many users from desktop operating systems, Apple have simplified and improved upon the concept for use on a mobile device by abandoning the traditional hierarchical structure in favour of a simple two-level system. This has the advantage of making it easy to navigate between multiple folders without getting lost whilst encouraging – some might say forcing – users to keep their folders manageable by restricting them to no more than a dozen apps each. (Why it isn’t possible to add 16 apps to each folder, I’m not sure, as there is sufficient space on screen for this, but perhaps the designers wanted to keep a clear visual distinction between folders and home pages, which already support up to 16 apps).

One slightly peculiar aspect of the new navigation system is that pressing the Home button no longer takes you back to the home page, but to the last set of apps that you viewed, even if these were within a folder. Consequently, it can take up to three presses of the Home button to navigate from an app back to the main home page (pressing the button a second time closes the currently open folder, and a third is necessary if you have more than one home page). This somewhat mixed blessing, however, is mitigated by the implementation of iOS’s task switching feature (below), which supports an alternative way to switch between recently used apps.

Unfortunately, the same trick does not work for Spotlight search results – one of the cases where it would be genuinely useful to return to the last viewed page. Perhaps Apple will address these issues through a future software update or configurable user setting, for example by making the Home button return to the main home page, which seems a sensible default setting for most users.

Multitasking

Perhaps the most requested (and touted) feature of iOS 4 is its ability to run multiple third-party apps in the background while you continue to carry out other tasks. iPhone OS, of course, has long supported this for built-in applications, such as Mail, Messages and Phone, which multitask quite happily alongside other built-in and third-party apps. What many users wanted, however, was the ability to run additional apps of their choosing, such as a music player, in the background, and to switch rapidly between apps without losing their current state.

Apple’s implementation of ‘multitasking’ has been a matter of some controversy, since it places strict limits upon what apps can and can’t do in the background, and requires developers to update their apps in order to support the feature. The reason for this is – quite rightly, in my view – to avoid unnecessary drain on battery and memory resources, as well as to avoid creating potential security loopholes that could be exploited by rogue apps running in the background – something that plagues Windows and other desktop operating systems. Unlike its competitors, such as Google Android, iOS does not strictly speaking multitask third-party apps as a matter of course, but instead provides support for apps to offer many of the benefits of multitasking without its main disadvantages – namely reduced battery life, performance and task management issues.

The most noticeable aspect of all this is the ‘recent apps’ list that appears whenever you double-press your iDevice’s Home button (iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4 and second generation iPod touch only). This enables you to switch between apps without having to return to the home screen, and is supported even by apps even that have yet to be updated for iOS 4. Those that have been updated will, however, return you to the same point at which you left them, giving the effect of multitasking, minus any background updating of the app when not in use (something that is relevant for apps, such as Twitter and Facebook, which pull data from the Internet). To return to the current app, you can simply tap on the main display and the recent apps list drops off the bottom of the display.

Fast app switching works extremely well and soon becomes second nature, avoiding the need to return to the home screen to relaunch frequently used apps. Recent apps are listed in order of last use, making it easy to switch between all your favourite apps with a single tap. To quit an app – something that is not required, but can be useful from to keep your recent app list tidy from time to time – you simply hold down one of the icons until it starts to jiggle and then tap one or more of the red ‘–’ buttons that appears in the corner of every recent app. However, since the currently running app never appears in the recently used list, this can make it tricky to quit an app that you only want to use once. I can see why Apple have implemented it this way, but this is hopefully something that they will address in a future update – perhaps by supporting a ‘flick’ gesture to dismiss the currently running app.

Double-pressing the Home button and swiping to the right also gives access to the music player controls. These work with the built-in iPod app by default but can also be used to control other music apps designed to work as background apps. A padlock icon gives access to the new screen lock function which enables you to use your device in portrait mode even when holding the display horizontally – something that is quite useful if you are prone to using your iDevice whilst lying in bed or undergoing sudden changes in orientation. Quite why you would want to do this is, of course, another matter!

Mail

The final feature of iOS 4 that has undergone something of an overhaul is the Mail app. This now supports a single unified inbox, includes all messages from each of your configured mail accounts as well as message threading, which chains together related message for simplified browsing. Both features work well, although I wish that the unified mailbox feature had been extended to other standard mailboxes, i.e. Drafts, Sent, Trash, and so on, as per the Mac e-mail client.

Furthermore, although the unified inbox cuts out a level of navigation when viewing incoming messages, it is still necessary to navigate through a separate list of folders when viewing messages in other locations. A better solution might have been to cut out the navigation page altogether in favour of a unified folder browser with collapsible sections for each account and mailbox. Again, this is precisely what Mac OS X Mail does, making it difficult to see why the same approach hasn’t been employed in iOS.

Minor gripes aside, however, the updated Mail app makes working with multiple accounts and mailboxes (including moving messages between e-mail accounts – something that was impossible in previous OS versions) a breeze, and is a worthwhile improvement over the previous version. There’s still no way to flag or prioritise messages, however, or to reorder your list of e-mail accounts without re-syncing them via iTunes, so there is still room for improvement.

Additional Features

Aside from the obvious changes, iOS 4 incorporates a host of minor tweaks and enhancements throughout the OS. There is hardly an app that hasn’t been updated in some way, although the overall impression is one of quiet evolution rather than radical overhaul. Apple are clearly putting considerable effort into growing their iOS platform in a measured and gradual way, with many of the most interesting enhancements (such as support for the iPhone 4’s inbuilt gyroscope) occurring behind the scenes in order to enable developers to access more of the iPhone and iPod touch’s not inconsiderable capabilities.

Of course the other major new feature of iOS 4 is its support for FaceTime video calling – an iPhone 4 feature that I’ve yet to try out. The next and final post in this series will look at FaceTime as well as the widely reported issue with the iPhone 4’s external antenna that leads to impaired reception or call quality. All in all, however, iOS 4 represents a significant and worthwhile update to Apple’s mobile platform that lays the foundations for yet another wave of third-party innovation that will continue to redefine what mobile computing and electronic communication in the 21st century is all about. I can’t wait to see what app developers come up with!

First impressions of the iPhone 4

Mon, 28 Jun 2010 15:09:54 +0100

Last week I was lucky enough to pick up a brand new iPhone 4. I was originally hoping to get one on launch day, and was even first in the queue at my local Orange shop, but due to stock restrictions (they only had four of the 16Gb model), I had to wait until Saturday to collect up my 32Gb iPhone and head excitedly home to try it out. Here are my first impressions after a few days of using the device…

The first thing that hits you when you switch on the iPhone 4 is the quality of the display. The resolution is simply amazing. With 326 pixels per inch (that’s over 100,000 pixels packed into every square inch – four times the number on any previous iPhone!), Apple claims that the iPhone 4’s ‘retina display’ can display more detail than the human eye can discern at normal operating distance. This makes on-screen text look more like printed type than a traditional computer display as there is literally no visible pixellation. It really has to be seen to be believed and makes the displays on just about any other phone, including previous models of iPhone or a regular computer display, look positively outdated.

Rather cleverly, Apple have designed the latest version of the iPhone’s operating system, dubbed ‘iOS 4’, so that even applications which weren’t written to take advantage of the iPhone 4 can display text at the higher resolution. Other graphical elements are simply scaled up, which does cause a certain amount of pixellation, but the overall effect is impressive. Suddenly all of your existing apps look much cleaner, clearer and crisper – and the colour balance and contrast of the display is similarly impressive, albeit slightly less bright than the iPhone 3G, but that’s easily adjustable.

The second thing that hits you is the sheer responsiveness of the iPhone 4. Powered by Apple’s custom designed A4 chip and equipped with a respectable 512Gb of RAM – that’s double the capacity of the iPad – this thing really screams. There is virtually no time lag between touching or swiping the screen and the visual response, with animated transitions appearing effortlessly smooth. Again, it makes using my two-year old iPhone 3G seem like wading through treacle by comparison, and it’s no slouch, especially when running iOS 4 which gave it a nice performance boost.

The physical appearance of the new iPhone takes a little more getting used to. In comparison to the sleek curves of the earlier models, the new model employs a glass and stainless steel design that is both futuristic and more than a tad retro (Steve Jobs compared it to an old Leica camera, which seems about right). Slightly thinner and taller than the 3G, it sits perfectly flat on a desktop and can even be balanced on its edge for video calling (although I wouldn’t necessarily recommend it – you wouldn’t want it to fall over part way through!). I must admit, I slightly prefer the feel of the 3G, whose rounded edges sit more comfortably in your hand despite the plasticky finish, but there’s no denying that the iPhone 4 simply oozes quality and style.

The new iPhone resembles a miniature sleek black monolith, reminiscent of Stanley Kubrick’s 2001, that has been hewn from black glass or polished slate. Even though the weight is supposedly almost identical to the 3G, it instantly feels solid and substantial in a way that commands respect bordering upon awe when you start to use it. Despite the shiny surfaces, which are a magnet for fingerprints, the oleophobic coating ensures that a quick wipe will return it to pristine condition (although if you’re particular about this kind of thing then you might want to invest in a case and/or screen protector to prevent scratches). It’s definitely more Jaguar than Amstrad and seems tailor made for the business market.

The other notable feature of the iPhone 4 is its rear facing 5 megapixel camera with built-in LED flash. Despite having relatively limited resolution by the standard of today’s digital camera, which commonly exceed double that value, the results for both still and video photography are very impressive. This is apparently due to the design of the CCD sensor which enables more light to be captured per pixel, resulting in clearer more dynamic images. With automated tap-to-focus, digital zoom and 30 frames per second HD video capabilities, you could easily leave your regular point-and-shoot camera at home next time you go on holiday and not be disappointed with the results.

Of course, the rear facing camera is just one of the iPhone 4’s cameras – the other being situated on the display side for video calling. I haven’t had a chance to try this feature out yet since I don’t know anyone else who has an iPhone 4 (as yet video calling is iPhone-to-iPhone only, although this looks set to change in a software update some time next year), but both the camera and phone apps allow you to switch between front and rear facing views at will, which is a nice touch. The front facing camera supports standard VGA resolution.

Having been an O2 customer for several years and somewhat unimpressed with their 3G network, which is patchy at best, I decided to get the iPhone 4 under contract with Orange. So far, I haven’t been disappointed with reception and can even get a decent 3G signal from home (I live in a basement flat where O2 coverage was almost non-existent). I have yet to try the phone ‘out in the wild’, but initial indications look good.

One minor disappointment was that the visual voicemail feature of the iPhone is not yet supported by any UK network other than O2, so I can only get the regular voicemail service that counts towards my call time. This is something that I wasn’t aware of prior to buying the phone, and I hope Orange will sort it out soon. However, it seems a reasonable trade-off for improved cellphone and data coverage which, with the incorporation of T-Mobile’s cellular network, should result in excellent reception and fast mobile Internet all round.

A couple of other points that are worthy of mention. The iPhone’s built in (mono) speaker is much louder than previous incarnations – so much so that it’s easily audible even on minimum volume, perhaps slightly too much so. Second, both the front and back surfaces of the iPhone 4 feature an oleophobic coating which is designed to repel dirt and grease. Whilst this doesn’t prevent the accumulation of fingerprints or dust altogether, it does at least make it easy to clean the iPhone – a simple wipe being sufficient to restore it to its former glory. If you are concerned about scratches, however, you may want to invest in one of the many screen protectors available.

That concludes my initial look at the iPhone 4. Future posts will examine the latest features of iOS 4 along with the infamous iPhone 4 ‘death grip’ issue which is currently causing something of a stir. Apart from that, however, I’m extremely happy with my purchase and look forward to putting the new iPhone through its paces over the coming few weeks and months. Stay tuned for updates…

What next for Mac OS X?

Fri, 18 Jun 2010 16:54:54 +0100

With all the hullaballoo over Apple’s new iPad, iPhone and iOS 4 (formerly iPhone OS), you could be excused for thinking that Apple has forgotten about its other well-known computing platform: the Mac. Although Apple have continued to update their hardware, having released a new low profile set top box-style Mac mini just this week, the underlying operating system that powers the Mac, aka Mac OS X, hasn’t undergone a major revamp in quite some time.

The current release of Mac OS X, aka ‘Snow Leopard’ (Apple likes to name its operating system releases after big cats for reasons beyond the understanding of us mere mortals), boasted important under-the-hood changes designed to enable the Mac to make the best use of new multicore processors and graphics architectures. Its user interface, however, which provides the immediately recognisable look and feel—nay, the very soul—of the Mac, has barely changed since 2007, during which time the iPhone OS platform has gone from strength to strength.

You could be forgiven for thinking that Apple chosen to focus upon its mobility products, which are flying off the shelves faster than hot cakes at an annual meeting of the hot cakes appreciation society. Perhaps Mac OS itself, some have dared to suggest, might be put out to pasture, having outlived its usefulness in this modern always-connected mobile computing oriented world. You could be forgiven for thinking that, but I suspect that you’d be wrong.

What, then, is next for OS X and how will it differentiate itself from the increasingly powerful iPad and iPhone platforms, which look set to dominate the next few years of technological innovation, just as they have done for the last few? The answer, I think, lies in the common code base that is shared by both platforms, along with Apple’s move away from traditional window, menu, icon, pointing device (WIMP) interaction towards the use of touch screen gesture based devices.

Apple has invested heavily in the development and patenting of multitouch technologies, and owns a swathe of patents in this area that others will find difficult to replicate. Rumour has it they will soon be announcing a new touchpad accessory for their range of desktop computers, which will bring sophisticated multitouch gesture support to the Mac platform proper (the recent iWork apps for iPad being a case in point). The move away from WIMP to touch screen laptop and desktop devices seems imminent, raising the question of how traditional operating systems such as OS X and Microsoft Windows are going to adapt to this new age of touchy-feeliness.

Microsoft has so far taken a pragmatic approach, building support for touch displays into their latest desktop OS offering, Windows 7. This has the advantage of presenting users with a familiar and consistent interface across touch and non-touch based devices. However, traditional WIMP based interfaces do not adapt well to touch screen interaction, with visual elements often being too small and fiddly to accurately select by touch, where the finger covers the object being selected, along with the lack of any equivalent to ‘mouse over’ behaviour, which is required for the correct operation of many apps—and indeed some rather less well designed web sites.

Apple, I’d suggest, intend to take a very different approach. With the runaway success of their App Store, Apple have positioned iOS as the dominant touch based application platform in the mobile space. I think that the next thing we will see is the beginning of a convergence between Mac OS X and iOS within the next 12 months, and possibly much sooner. Indeed, I think it has already started to happen.

The latest version of iOS adds many features that are already present in Mac OS X, pointing the way towards eventual ‘feature parity’ with its desk bound cousin. Powerful desktop class apps may already be built on top of the same touch-based OS that powers the iPhone and iPod touch, as demonstrated by Apple’s recently developed iWork and iMovie apps. However, rather than simply ditching OS X, however, which is well suited towards professional and creative use, I predict that the next version of OS X will itself be able to run iOS apps.

Despite the fact that iOS and OS X are based on processing architectures (the former uses the Cambridge designed ARM processor, whilst OS X runs on PowerPC and, more recently, Intel processors), a number of factors make this development an entirely feasible one. Indeed, Apple already has the necessary technology to run iOS apps on the desktop as part of its Xcode development environment, which features fully functional iPhone and iPad simulators. Furthermore, increasing use of ‘virtual machine’ technology, such as LLVM and to Apple’s new OpenCL standard, which simulate a common hardware platform in software, getting software written for one architecture to run on another has become commonplace, and well within the capabilities of today’s desktop class hardware.

This strategy could make sense of another apparently hostile move made by Apple against third-party middleware vendors, such as Adobe. By requiring iOS app developers to write their applications exclusively with its own development tools, Apple is able to retain a greater degree of control over the future of the iOS platform, avoiding the emergence of ‘lowest common denominator’ middleware platform as de facto cross-platform standard—Adobe’s Flash being obvious example of this.

The reasons for this move may not be entirely anti-competitive, however, as is often claimed, but rather sets the scene for developments yet to come, such as cross-compilation of iOS apps to run under both iOS and Mac OS X as part of an iOS ‘virtual machine’. Only by keeping tight control of its platform and developer tools can Apple pull this off to ensure a smooth transition between traditional WIMP based apps and its new multitouch user interface paradigm.

So what will this new iOS and touchscreen compatible Mac look like? My bet is that we’ll see an OS platform that is capable of running both existing WIMP-style apps and touchscreen-aware iApps, including all of the 200,000+ existing iPhone, iPad and iPod touch applications, side by side. iPhone apps would appear as draggable on-screen windows, or perhaps Dashboard widgets. With minimal developer support, games and more sophisticated apps would be able to run in simulated-iPad or full-screen modes, just iPhone apps currently do on the iPad.

Eventually, many of Apple’s entry-range consumer products, such as the MacBook and possibly the iMac, will transition to touch-based displays, making them increasingly resemble larger and more powerful versions of the iPad (particularly in the case of the iMac, whose form factor will need to change from providing a metaphorical desktop to being a literal desktop display with a wedge-shaped touch screen that sits on the surface of your desk). Its high end ‘prosumer’ models, including the Mac Pro and Mac mini (now masquerading as an aluminium clad set top box) will retain the keyboard and trackpad (rather than mouse) user input methods but with integrated iApp support.

If you think that this seems fanciful, then take a closer look at what Apple is doing with iOS. Remember the revolutionary ‘black gloss’ UI that was rumoured to be coming to Mac OS X? Well, it’s already here and running on your iPhone, iPod and iPad. These devices may well represent a kind of Trojan horse that smuggles touch-based interactivity into the heart of the Mac platform, kickstarting a leap in personal computing the likes of which we haven’t seen since the emergence of the original desktop UI.

With the success of the iPhone, iPad and iPod not just as throwaway consumer devices, but as an application development platform in their own right, Apple has caught a glimps of a higher-tech, easier to use and more emotionally satisfying form of technology. Far from abandoning Mac OS X, I think that Apple will lever the iOS platform to reinvigorate and rejuvinate their desktop systems beyond anything we’ve seen so far. In the process, they will be hoping to steal a march on their competition, who are busy transitioning their legacy windowing-based OSs into the brave new world of touch. Apple, on the other hand, intend leapfrog them by releasing a Mac compatible verison of iOS, built right into OS X 10.7 alongside Boot Camp (for Windows compatibility) and Cocoa/Rosetta for legacy Mac apps.

If I’m right, the shape of computing is about to get a whole lot more interesting.

It’s multitasking, Steve, but not as we know it

Tue, 13 Apr 2010 21:05:04 +0100

Last week, Apple announced a developer preview – essentially an alpha version – of iPhone OS 4. One of the main features of the new update is to enable users to multitask, i.e. simultaneously run multiple third-party applications, a feature that has long been at the top of many users’ wish lists.

Despite the confusion surrounding the device’s multitasking capabilities, the iPhone, along with the iPod touch and iPad, which run the same underlying operating system, have long been able to multitask. In fact, the iPhone already supports a range of potentially concurrent activities, including:

• Sending and receiving e-mails
• Sending and receiving text messages
• Making and receiving phone calls
• Playing music and audiobooks via the iPod application
• Downloading and installing software via the App Store

Why Apple Restricts Multitasking

The restrictions on multitasking are not due to any problems or omissions from the iPhone’s operating system, which is perfectly capable of supporting an arbitrary number of concurrent processes, but rather an attempt by Apple to improve the overall user experience by conserving battery life and system resources. It is not true, therefore, that the iPhone, iPod and iPad “cannot multitask”. Rather, Apple decided to disallow third-party applications to be run in the background in order to improve the quality of the iPhone user experience – something that the company protects voraciously.

The reason for this decision is obvious when you consider the problems inherent to running multiple resource-hungry applications on a standard desktop computer. As soon as you start to run more applications than your computer can comfortably handle, the responsiveness of the system slows down to a crawl, and in some cases may even cause applications – or even worse, the entire operating system, Windows users beware! – to crash. These problems are considerably more acute on a mobile device that has considerably less processing power and system resources than the average desktop PC, not to mention the security implications of enabling malicious programs, such as viruses and botnets, to run in the background where they potentially monitoring your activities and/or disrupt other applications.

Rather than allow the iPhone user experience to degrade in this way, Apple chose to simply ban third-party apps from running in the background, meaning that each app can effectively assume that it has complete control of the device, with all the benefits of processor and memory resources that this entails. This in turn results in a more enjoyable and consistent user experience at the expense of the ability to, for example, listen to Spotify in your web browser while composing an e-mail in Mail.

The iPhone Multitasking Model

So what changed? Starting with iPhone OS 4, third-party applications will be permitted to run in the background provided that they adhere to one of the standard models that are supported by the OS. These are designed to match a range of common multitasking scenarios, thereby enabling the operating system to optimise the allocation of system resources for precisely the task (or tasks) in hand.

iPhone OS 4 supports no less than seven multitasking models. These, along with some applications that might typically make use of them, are:

1. Background audio (Spotify)
2. Voice over IP (Skype)
3. Background location (Google Location)
4. Push Notifications and ‘Local Notifications’ (instant messaging and other apps)
5. Task Completion (Flickr photo upload)
6. Fast App Switching (other apps)

The last option enables users to switch between multiple apps without reverting to the default state, as occurs when the application is restarted. Whether this will require specific developer support or be enabled by default is unclear.

iPhone OS’s multitasking support differs to the standard free-for-all multitasking implemented by most modern computer operating systems in that it requires developers to specifically build support for multitasking into their apps. Desktop operating systems typically allow programs to assume access to unlimited processing and memory resources, automatically paging data to and from disk as necessary. Unfortunately, this has effect of drastically slowing the system down once all of the system’s memory is in use, leading to some of the difficulties described above.

The iPhone OS multitasking model makes sense for any device where random access memory is limited (the iPhone 3GS and iPad have just 256Mb of RAM – most modern PCs and Macs would be incapable of running even a single program in this little memory!). By supplying the OS with important information as to what resources an app requires, the effect of seamless multitasking can be achieved without the same drain on resources, processor power and battery life that occurs in the free-for-all model, which is implemented by some of the iPhone’s competitors (e.g. Google’s Nexus One and other Android phones). The cost of this approach is that developers will have to write some additional code if they wish their application to support multitasking, but provided that the development overhead is kept to a minimum, as currently seems to be the case, this seems to be a price well worth paying.

One More Thing?

In many ways, Apple’s approach to multitasking on the iPhone harks back to the ‘co-operative multitasking’ of the pre-OS X Mac era, except that iPhone OS, like Mac OS X, upon which it is based, already supports fuly pre-emptive multitasking courtesy of its Unix roots (pun intended). An interesting question arises, however, when you see the design of the multitasking function when invoked by a double-press of the device’s home button from the iPhone’s home page. Not only does the screen reveal a set of icons corresponding to the currently running applications, but the rest of the display turns curiously grey, suggesting that it may in future be used to display additional user interface elements, such as an OS X style dashboard with user-configurable ‘widgets’.

Now, far be it from me to suggest that I am privy to the inner workings of Apple’s closely guarded design process, but it seems out of character – to say the least – for the company to leave such a large portion of screen real-estate unused, especially in relation to a key feature of the new OS release. It is highly likely, I therefore suggest, that the multitasking screen may also give access to an additional new feature that has yet to be announced, namely the ability to run dashboard-style widgets on the iPhone, iPod and iPad. When asked about this possibility (although not in connection with the multitasking feature), Steve Jobs, the boss and CEO of Apple, pointedly refused to comment directly, stating only that “everything is possible”. This may suggest that Apple is working on, if it has not already implemented, such a feature, and is holding it back for the final release of iPhone OS 4. This would not be unusual given that widgets are a feature already available in Mac OS X and, unlike multitasking, is not something that developers will need to build support into their apps for well before the new OS ships.

This existence of such a feature would also explain the omission of built-in apps for the iPad to access clock, voice recordings, stock and weather information, since these functions could be arguably better implemented as dashboard-style widgets, rather than full-blown apps, as they currently appear on the iPhone. It is even possible that the iPad will be able to run all or most of the existing OS X dashboard widgets, since these primarily rely on standard technologies, such as HTML and JavaScript, plus elements of the OS X user interface that also form part of iPhone OS. Alternatively, Apple may choose to introduce such a feature in some future iPhone OS release; e.g. OS 4.1 or 5.0, which is likely to be released next summer.

Whatever the truth behind the iPhone widget rumours, multitasking looks set to be an invaluable element of the next iPhone OS release, albeit in a slightly different form to what many commentators had envisaged. Sadly, my iPhone – one of the original 3G models – will be unable to make use of the new feature, which is available to 3GS and third-generation iPod users only due to restrictions on the amount of system RAM and processor speed required to support the new multitasking. I guess that it’s time upgrade, so it’s lucky that Apple are set to launch a new iPhone this summer which is widely expected to sport a front-facing camera for video calling and conferencing. I look forward to putting both the new phone and OS through their paces!

Apple’s iPad: re-imagining the personal computer

Sat, 13 Mar 2010 15:34:01 +0000

It’s now over a month since the announcement of Apple’s eagerly awaited tablet computer: the iPad (as it finally turned out to be called). Despite mixed reactions from pundits and the technology press, I think that the device represents a genuinely notable stage in the evolution of personal computing. Far from being an all-singing, all-dancing multi-touch version of the notebook computer – a form factor pioneered in the 1980s by Apple and Sony – the iPad attempts to establish a new class of mobile devices that appeal not only to computer geeks (like myself), but to the average non- or casual computer user. As a result, the iPad represents a serious attempt to rethink – or ‘re-imagine’ as Apple somewhat fancifully puts it – the personal computer.

Close, but No Banana

Before going on to say why I think the iPad is so interesting, I’d first like to revisit a few of the predictions I made before it came out. Like most other commentators, I was very much caught out – not to mention initially disappointed – by the device’s limitations. In general, my predictions for the iPad’s processing and graphics capabilities, networking and battery life were pretty much spot on, including the availability of dual models – one with both Wi-Fi and 3G connectivity and one that is Wi-Fi only. Where the iPad surprised was in its name (I predicted ‘iSlate’, partly due to the inevitable jokes that were doing the rounds on Twitter for days afterwards), its non-widescreen aspect ratio (4:3 rather than 16:9), lack of front-facing camera (which rules out its use for video conferencing – one of my predicted ‘killer apps’ for the device) and price (the iPad will retail for around half the price I expected, although final UK pricing and data plans have yet to be announced).

Some of these difference make perfect sense once you see how the device is intended to be used. A 4:3 screen aspect is much more convenient for use in both portrait and landscape modes, and enables connection to an external projector or VGA monitor for displaying slideshows. Even so, I can’t help thinking it would have looked nicer if Apple had used the ‘golden ratio’ (1:√2) to give the iPad the same aspect ratio as an A4 sheet of paper, or else the 3:2 ratio of the iPhone for consistency with its other products, though no doubt they tried and rejected this for good reason.

The lack of a front-facing camera is harder to explain, especially since the hardware seems to have been designed with this in mind. The camera may have been dropped in an effort to keep costs down, or so as not to upstage the fourth generation iPhone which is likely to have just this feature. Alternatively, there may have been bandwidth concerns given the fixed-price nature of the data tariff (which, by the way, doesn’t include voice-based calling or texts, although it looks like VOIP applications, such as Skype, will be supported). There’s also the issue of how practical video conferencing would be on a device that is designed to be handheld, but which is considerably larger and heavier than a phone. You might easily end up with sort arms and/or looking up somebody else’s nostrils – not . That said, I’m sure that Apple will launch a video-enabled iPad at some point, so perhaps we’ll have to wait a bit longer for that one.

Making Simple Things Simple and Complex Things Possible

Contrary to expectations, the iPad runs a relatively minor revision of iPhone OS 3 and so lacks many of the new software-based features, such as enhanced multitasking, desktop-style home screens, for which many users have been hoping. Having said that, most of the applications that come with the iPad have been substantially redesigned to take advantage of the device’s larger form factor and corresponding opportunities for interaction. As a result, the iPad is highly tuned for those tasks that users perform most often, including web browsing, checking or writing e-mails, and viewing or searching through photos, and therein lies the secret to the device’s success.

Apple have realised that most of the time, users don’t want or need the power – not to mention complexity – of a general purpose windowing-based OS. Instead, they want something that will do a small number of simple things extremely well, typically in conjunction with their desktop or laptop computer. This explains both why so many technology pundits seem to find the iPad unappealing, since they do want the flexibility and power that a general purpose PC has to offer, as well as why the iPad will undoubtedly appeal to many mainstream users, since it is optimised for precisely the tasks that they perform most often. As soon as you realise this, the iPad starts to look like an entirely different proposition, and you begin to see why it represents such an important step forward in the evolution of personal computing. Instead of users having to adapt to a desktop environment that has grown up around the needs of businesses, IT departments and electronic document processing (the Windows-Icon-Menu-Pointing Device metaphor was, after all, invented by Xerox at their famous Palo Alto Research Centre), the iPad offers an easy to use, intuitive interface that allows you to manipulate interface elements directly using the tools most suited to the job: your fingers. It isn’t supposed to be a replacement for your main computer, or to do everything that a laptop can do. Instead, it’s a handy notepad-sized interface to the digital world.

This realisation has led some to describe the iPad as a passive media consumption device, but this is quite wrong. Although media consumption (principally films, TV, music, books and photos) is undoubtedly one of its main applications, the true power of the iPad lies in its ability to download and run third-party programs from Apple’s App Store. Unlike the iPhone and iPod touch, its display isn’t limited to simple browsing or games, but enables a wide range of multitouch interactivity that simply isn’t possible on a desktop computer. To showcase this, Apple have ported their iWork productivity suite, to the iPad, including an extremely capable word processor, spreadsheet and slideshow application, that will retail for just $9.99 (approx. £6.49) each. This not only demonstrates the full capabilities of the device, but will appeal to many business or education users who may want to use their iPad for light word processing or number crunching on the go, or for designing and giving presentations. Other creative applications, such as Brushes, show just what is possible, and the possibility for online gaming is enormous.

Part of the iPad’s appeal is that users can easily download and install an application and start to use it within a few seconds without the need to understand the intricacies of a hierarchical file system – something that many of my non-technophile friends find incredibly confusing. The iPad’s emphasis on direct manipulation and interaction with user content – no nested dialogue boxes here! – makes the iPad much more intuitive and enjoyable to use than most desktop-based operating systems, including Mac OS X, upon which it is based. Essentially, Apple have created an integrated hardware and software design that addresses an entirely different market to the average laptop or desktop PC, and which is so simple to use that it has almost universal appeal – a combination they are hoping is a winning formula that will put them years ahead of the competition who are still trying to shoehorn the old desktop windowing based metaphor into a tablet or netbook size form factor.

Back to the Future?

So if much of the technology in the iPad already exists in the form of the iPhone or iPod touch, and most of its functions are supported by the average PC or laptop, then why should anyone buy an iPad? The answer, I think, lies in the evolution of the PC itself and the increasing ubiquity of computing devices. In many ways, what we normally think of as a ‘PC’ – i.e. a large beige or black box with separate monitor and keyboard – is the result of the convergence of a range of technologies from the typewriter to the desktop minicomputers of the 1970s. Whilst this makes sense given their business pedigree, I’m old enough to remember a different set of computers that emerged in the 1980s, including the Sinclair ZX81 and Spectrum, Commodore 64 and BBC Micro (the first of which, incidentally, I learned to program at the age of 10). These devices were quirky, minimalist, underpowered and, it has to be said, a lot of fun. Had the evolution of computers taken a slightly different turn, it is conceivable that something like the iPad might have emerged much sooner, as illustrated by the rapid emergence of the so-called smartphone.

In many ways, it is a historical accidental that present day computers happen to take the form that they do, and as such devices become increasingly ubiquitous, it should be no surprise that new and different form factors begin to emerge. Apple (to their credit) have been one of the pioneers of these developments. You only need to look at the small but perfectly formed range of products they produce, such as the iPod, PowerBook, iMac, XServe and now the iPad, to realise that computers already come in many shapes and sizes, and the iPad is just another step towards one of the original inspirations behind the Xerox PARC design philosophy: ‘intelligent paper’. The iPad isn’t supposed to be an alternative to or replacement for the PC, but an evolution of it, and as such has its own strengths and weaknesses – not to mention unique applications, many of which have yet to be discovered.

Far from being a specialist e-book or media consumption device, the iPad is another step towards a brave new world of computing in which instead of us adapting to the limitations of technology, the technology adapts to us, making user interaction a much more fluid, dynamic and enjoyable process than is possible with the current generation of electronic devices. I for one find this to be an exciting and welcome development, and am looking forward to getting my hands on one when they are released in the UK at end of April (which, by a remarkable coincidence, happens to coincide with my birthday!). Whilst many of the shortcomings of the forthcoming iPad OS will be addressed via new versions of the software, the basic idea is sound and will, I think, bring many new customers into the Apple fold. Crucially, many of these will not be traditional ‘power-users’ but ordinary folks for whom the iPad will, I think, be a breath of fresh air, open the door to a new and exciting way to use and interact with our digital creations.

Yet another Apple tablet prediction

Sun, 24 Jan 2010 17:36:42 +0000

The tech media has been abuzz over recent months with widespread rumours (and quite possibly some leaks) about a forthcoming touchscreen based ‘tablet’ computer from Apple Inc, the release of which looks likely to be announced on Wednesday. I thought I’d add to the already considerable volume of speculation concerning this device by venturing a few predictions of my own as to precisely what form it will take. I should stress that these are not based on insider knowledge, but are rather calculated guesses based upon rumours, Apple’s history, and what seems most likely given the company’s strategies and interests. At any rate, it will add a little more fun (for me at least) to see how accurate these predictions are compared to whatever finally emerges from Cupertino next week…

Name

First off, the new product’s name, which remains shrouded in mystery. ‘iSlate’ seems the current favourite, which does sound kind of cool, although a little odd to my ears (cf. ‘isolate’). ‘iPad’, which sounds like some kind of sanitary product, and is in any case rather close to the existing ‘iPod’, and ‘iTablet’ have also been suggested. ‘MacBook touch’ and even ‘iBook’ could also be possibilities, although it seems more likely that Apple will want to maintain a clear distinction between the new device and their existing and previous range of laptops given that the two are most likely based upon different processors and flavours of OS X (see below). I’m therefore plumping for ‘iSlate’, in which case expect to see a slew of new product announcements from rival manufacturers hoping to capitalise on the new ‘slate computing’ product category which, unlike ‘tablet computing’, hasn’t already been done to death.

Hardware

So, what is the iSlate? It’s a portable touch-screen based computer along the lines of the iPhone, only bigger. Just as with the iPhone, you’ll be able to use it to browse the web, listen to music, watch films, send e-mails, play games, and download and run a wide range of third-party applications made available though the Apple iTunes Store. The iSlate’s physical appearance will, I think, reflect its heritage, resembling a giant iPhone (above) with similar external controls and connectors: a single ‘home’ button, volume buttons, ‘silent’ switch, headphone and dock connectors (possibly two to allow for landscape and portrait orientation). The internal specifications of the iSlate will look something like this:

10” LED 16:9 ratio backlit display
1GHz ARM Cortex-A9 processor with
integrated graphics processor
1Gb RAM
32Gb, 64Gb or 128Gb of internal storage (Flash)
802.11a/b/g/n Wi-Fi capability as standard
GSM Edge and 3G wireless connectivity (optional)
3 megapixel front-facing camera
Inbuilt GPS, compass, microphone and speaker
10 hour battery life

Crucially, I think that the iSlate will be based around an ARM processor like the iPhone, rather than Intel processors, as with the Mac, thus enabling improved power efficiency and a longer battery life. This will also make the iSlate compatible with most existing iPhone applications which, with minor modifications, will also run on the device (see below).

I expect that Apple will launch two different models of the iSlate, one of which supports standard Wi-Fi networking (like the iPod touch, although with faster 802.11n speeds), and another that adds 3G connectivity (like the iPhone). The standard model will cost around $1000 (£800) and the 3G model $1200 (£1000) plus network charges, although the latter also will be available with a 24-month phone contract, subsidising the price to around half this amount. This may seem expensive for a netbook competitor, but Apple always go for the premium market first and then reduce their pricing as economies of scale permit, so you can expect to see the second generation iSlate retail for several hundred dollars less than this.

Software

OK, now for the interesting bit. No doubt, the iSlate’s operating system will be based upon Apple’s Unix-derived OS X, but which version? My bet is that it will be a new and improved version of the iPhone’s operating system, enhanced to support the iSlate’s larger form factor and processing capabilities. In particular, I think the new OS (which I will dub OS 4.0 for reasons that will become apparent shortly), will support:

• Full multitasking, allowing switching between multiple concurrently running applications
• Various screen resolutions, allowing several iPhone-style applications to be run alongside each other (though not necessarily in overlapping windows)
• Multiple desktop-style ‘home pages’ with customisable icons and desktop widgets, à la the OS X Dashboard, as well as an enhanced application launcher or Dock
• Improved support for multiple ‘push’ notifications; e.g. a scrolling ticker-tape style display and/or browsable list of events (messages, texts, alarms, etc.)
• Enhanced multitouch gesture recognition, allowing many common functions to be carried out without the use of a keyboard or menus
• Built-in speech recognition for carrying out commands and dictating text in any application (as per Google’s Nexus One)
The enhanced multitouch and voice recognition support, some of which Mac OS X already implements, will enable many functions to be carried out without the use of an on-screen keyboard, although this will be accessible from within any app via a simple ‘flick’ gesture, or by default whenever a text based input field is activated.

As with the iPhone, the user interface will be very fluid and intuitive to use, with animations highlighting key interactions and transitions (switching between applications, for example) that make good use of the device’s enhanced graphics capabilities. Unlike the existing iPhone OS, however, OS 4.0 will add a raft of multi-touch gestures to support common functions – search, navigation, app switching, text manipulation, and so on – so that, once a user has learned the relevant gestures, they can interact with the device much more efficiently. As with the more traditional keyboard shortcuts, this will involve a certain learning curve, but the payoff will be well worth it in terms of increased productivity and ease of use.

The good news for existing iPhone customers is that OS 4.0 will also be available as a free software update (or at a small cost for iPod touch owners), providing support for many (though not all) of the features available in the iSlate OS. The bad news, I think, will be that multitasking will not be offered on the iPhone/iPod touch, or only in a very limited form for the more powerful iPhone 3GS and latest iPod touch devices, due to processor and memory limitations. I’d expect the software update to become available at around the same time as the iSlate itself (see below), with a beta version made available to developers immediately after the announcement (i.e. next week).

Applications

OK, so the iSlate will be like a giant iPhone with some fancy user interface enhancements and 3G connectivity. So, what will you do with it? Apart from the obvious applications that I’ve already mentioned (surfing the net, writing e-mails, audio and video player), I expect that there are three ‘killer apps’ for the new device. These are: (i) e-books and magazine (I can’t bring myself to call them ‘e-zines’), (ii) video conferencing, and (iii) gaming.

To take each of these in turn, the first has already been widely discussed, but will enable Apple and other third parties to sell premium quality interactive content that will rival, and in many cases exceed the capabilities of, traditional print media. In short, Apple hopes to do for publishing what it has already done for the music industry, and turn digital distribution of print media into a multi-billion dollar marketplace, of which they hope to carve out a sizable slice. Whilst it would probably be something of an overstatement to say that traditional publishers will flock to the new device (they are very cautious of losing revenue to a high profile player like Apple), there will almost certainly be several well known publications demonstrated during next week’s announcement, and if the iSlate takes off (which I think it will), no doubt others will follow.

Secondly, the addition of a front-facing camera (I don’t think that there will be a rear mounted camera – the slate form factor doesn’t lend itself to taking photos and this feature is already adequately supported by the iPhone 3GS, though I could be wrong about that given the possibilities for augmented reality applications) will make it possible to hold video chats with not only other iSlate users, but with anyone who has a webcam via the AIM and iChat applications. Video calling via a 3G network will be supported, though I suspect via an HTTP-based data connection rather than true 3G video calling, although best results will be achieved when using Wi-Fi, which will support multiple person video conferencing through the same virtual ‘room’ interface as iChat on the Mac.

The possibility of high quality mobile video calling will make the iSlate a genuine communications device, rather than just a fancy web browser. Of course, you’ll also be able to make regular telephone calls via the 3G model, and audio and text-only chat will also be supported via Wi-Fi (expect these features to appear on the next iPhone model, also due to be launched some time this summer). No doubt early adopters will have problems with connectivity and bandwidth, as was previously the case with the iPhone 3G, but this situation should continue to improve as network providers enhance their infrastructure to cope with increased demand over time.

The third ‘killer app’ will be games. The popularity of the iPod touch as a gaming platform has alleged taken Apple by surprise, but expect to see them capitalise upon this by demoing several high-profile and visually impressive games titles on Wednesday. As you would expect, these will run in full-screen mode, taking advantage of the iSlate’s large multitouch display and enhanced graphics capabilities to deliver a surprisingly immersive gaming experience. What’s more, the same titles will be made available for both the iSlate and iPhone/iPod touch, since the two will share the same operating system, albeit with differing hardware capabilities – a move will only serve to increase Apple’s presence in the entertainment market.

Of course, iSlate applications will not be limited to just the above areas. As with the iPhone, third-party apps will be readily downloadable from the iTunes Store, including productivity, lifestyle and business applications. The inclusion of a dock connector (or two) will also make it possible to connect all manner of hardware via a variety of third-party add-ons and adapters, thereby enabling a wide range of more ‘serious’ applications as well as fun stuff like live TV and games.

Availability

So, when will this miraculous device be available? My guess is some time in May, prior to the next iPhone update but after developers have been given a chance to play around with the new OS and update their apps to work on the new device. No doubt review models and software previews will be available, so expect to see plenty more hype and analysis over the next few months.

One More Thing…

As is traditional with Apple product announcements, CEO Steve Jobs, being the consummate showman that he is, often saves some snippet of news or information for the very end, prefaced with the words “one more thing”. In this case, we could see anything from impending MacBook Pro or iMac updates to a Verizon-compatible CDMA version of the iPhone for the American market, thus removing the tie between Apple and AT&T that has dogged the iPhone since its release. More importantly for the rest of us, this could mean that the iSlate will also be available on multiple network carriers from launch, thereby resulting in a better deal for consumers as carriers compete to attract buyers of Apple’s latest ‘must-have’ device to their network. iSlate-specific versions of Apple’s iWork and iLife software suites have also been rumoured, though I wouldn’t expect to see these (if at all) until later this year when the OS X versions are announced (also possible but unlikely at Wednesday’s event).

A more interesting, but perhaps even less likely candidate, for an OMT announcement would be a stand alone multitouch pad for Apple’s range of desktop computers. This would support the same range of multitouch gestures that are already available on the company’s MacBook range of laptops as well as via the recently launched Magic Mouse, plus a bunch of new ones supported by the iSlate. Such a product would further strengthen Apple’s reputation for innovation in human-computer interaction, though I suspect that we will not see such a ‘Magic Slate’ device from Apple for quite some time – if at all given the possibility of future touch-screen enabled Macs.

As for me, I don’t think I’ll be buying an iSlate any time soon (although put me in the waiting list for the Magic Slate, iPhone 3G video or iMac touch as soon as they become available). I will, however, be watching Wednesday’s announcement with great interest, and am sure that Apple’s new creation will mark the beginning in a new chapter in mobile computing and communications technology. As with so many Apple products, it will be like a little slice of the future accidentally fell into the present day, thereby allowing us to marvel at the new possibilities it presents for at least until as long as we start to take it completely for granted and wonder how on earth anyone could have possibility imagined that the future could turn out to be any different. Or have I been drinking too much of the Apple flavoured Kool-Aid again?

UPDATE (27/1/10): A few slight tweaks to the above predictions. I suspect that the tablet may be slightly cheaper than I have indicated above, though not by much, and that it may be available somewhat sooner (e.g. March or April). I also think it will have a surprisingly high density (1280 x 748?) display that will differentiate the iSlate from current netbook offerings, making it more suitable for reading print content and watching HD video, not to mention playing games and other applications. Anyway, not long to go now. Let’s see how the above predictions pan out…

Wireless heaven

Sun, 15 Mar 2009 14:06:00 +0000

I realised the other day that I haven’t posted anything to this blog for over a year now, so I thought I’d reinvigorate it with a few thoughts on the new AirPort Extreme and Time Machine products released by Apple a few weeks ago. Having owned an AirPort Extreme in the past, I can confirm that it’s an excellent unit, and the addition of dual-band capabilities (simultaneous Wireless G and Wireless N transmission), guest networking support (ideal for sharing your Internet connection with the neighbours) and mobile file sharing make the new model an even more attractive proposition. What got me thinking, however, is the possibility of a cross between the existing Apple TV and new AirPort Extreme, which would, in my opinion, be a killer product.

It always frustrates me when companies hobble their hardware in order to provide a unique selling point that isn’t provided by any of their other models, even though there is no technical reason why it couldn’t. This is often down to a lack of software support, rather than any specific hardware limitations. AirPort Express, for example, sports a USB connection which can be used for wireless printer sharing, but not to connect hard disks or other peripherals. Similarly, Apple TV supports full wireless networking, but lacks the configuration options for use as a wireless base station, even though this can be enabled via a simple software hack. Another example is the new iPod nano, whose ‘shake to shuffle’ feature could easily be replicated on both the iPod touch and iPhone, but for some reason is disabled on these models, not to mention the new iPod shuffle’s ‘VoiceOver’ facility, which could easily be replicated on any of the current iPod models.

In terms of its hardware, the Apple TV already incorporates all of the necessary elements for what I have in mind: wireless networking, a built-in hard drive, audio and video connectivity, USB support (albeit limited by software) and an Intel processor running Mac OS X. Given the necessary software, it would be possible to turn Apple TV into an all singing, all dancing, wireless hub with over the air backup facilities, audio streaming and connection sharing. Apple TV already supports the AirTunes protocol for playing music over a Wi-Fi network, and is just a software patch away from supporting connection sharing. By connecting the unit directly to an ethernet network it would then be possible to set up a wireless network that could be used to connect other computers and run Time Machine backups to a connected USB hard drive. Alternatively, the capacity of the inbuilt hard drive could be increased to 500Gb for use as both a media player and for backing up via Time Machine. With appropriate bandwidth throttling, it should even be possible to watch and download movies in real time at the same time as backups are taking place, as this is, once again, primarily a software issue.

Of course, there are many other enhancements that Apple could bring to Apple TV, such as support for widgets, e-mail, web browsing and downloadable software. But even without these, the existing Apple TV hardware could be made to do a lot more than it currently does, essentially absorbing all of the features of AirPort Extreme and Time Capsule into a single device. With a price point of around £300, this could be an extremely attractive proposition and wouldn’t necessarily cannibalise sales of existing hardware since many people will still want to purchase individual products to perform each function (e.g. wireless base station and media playback unit), or spend less on a single box that does just one job. Nevertheless, if Apple were to release such an ‘Apple TV Extreme’, then I for one would be first in the queue. Bung in remote streaming playback via your iPhone/iPod touch, a Blu-Ray player and/or TV tuner option (via USB?) and you’ve got one hell of a media centre with Apple-style panache. Now that’s my idea of wireless heaven!

Apple envy

Thu, 31 Jan 2008 11:19:42 +0000

I would first like to start this blog entry with a confession. Of the three Apple gadgets I said I would never buy, I now own one of them and have starting to lust after the other two! After trying out what seemed like an endless series of wireless routers with little success (more on that another time), I finally decided to plump for an Apple AirPort Extreme, which I bought second-hand on eBay. What I found out about the Extreme that I didn’t know before is that it’s one of the few wireless base stations on the market that can operate in both 2.4GHz and 5GHz frequency ranges, making it ideal for situations where there is a lot of interference from other networks and wireless devices. That said, in practice I found that the range I achieved in practice when using the 2.4GHz band was much better than at 5GHz (or so AirPort Radar tells me) and so decided to stick with the former, although I am now using 802.11n, rather than the older 802.11g standard, which in theory would give me a much faster wireless connection if only I owned more than one 802.11n-compatible device! Oh well, at least my home network is a little faster for accessing the internet and more future-proof than before…

Having used the AirPort Extreme for some time now, I found it to be extremely reliable and simple to set up. The support for USB printing and wireless disk sharing is an extremely welcome extra (or it will be, just as soon as Apple sort out wirelessly backing up to a network drive with Time Machine). Still, with the impending release of the Time Capsule with its built-in hard drive, I’m starting to warm to Apple’s wireless networking strategy a little, although I still feel that these devices are somewhat overpriced in the UK, especially given the absence of a built-in modem or USB modem compatibility (the latter being far more common in the UK than Ethernet modems). Wireless reception is as good as any unit that I’ve tried, which is quite a few, and the supplied AirPort Utility is a nice touch, and much nicer to use than the web-based interfaces that most wireless access points offer. In other words, I retract my former harsh words about the unit and would recommend it to anyone who’s in the market for a wireless access point but that already has (or is happy to buy) a separate DSL or ADSL modem.

The second Apple product that I find myself lusting after is the newly updated Apple TV, which brings movie downloading capabilities for North American users (although the rest of the world will, as usual, have to wait a while longer). With the US price of the Apple TV having dropped to just $229 for the basic model, I can really see it taking off, although I hope that the movie rental facility will also be usable on any PC or Mac that runs iTunes. Current reports are that this won’t be the case, although no doubt this is due to Apple’s wanting to sell more Apple TV units, and perhaps because of DRM concerns from the content providers. Nevertheless, the revamped software for the Apple TV looks pretty impressive and the ability to start watching a movie almost immediately you start downloading is a killer feature—provided that you have a sufficiently fast internet connection to allow real-time downloads, that is. Better still is the provision of 720p high definition movies with full Dolby 5.1 surround sound, which is arguably what Apple should have offered in the first place, but definitely a step in the right direction for those lucky enough to own a HDTV (again, this would work well with many computer monitors, such as Apple’s existing iMac models, so let’s hope that they allow us to watch movies in iTunes too!). What’s particularly impressive is that Apple were able to implement all of the required changes entirely in software without any alteration to the Apple TV hardware. This means that early adopters will be able to upgrade their Apple TVs to use the new service via a free download that will be available in a few weeks time. Suddenly, Apple TV has gone from being a rather lacklustre iTunes-in-a-box to a home entertainment centre, and I can see it really taking off once the movie download service is up and running. All of which leads me to think: I WANT ONE!

The other device that I’m now rather taken with is the iPod touch. I was happy to see that Apple have finally decided to add e-mail and widget support to the new iPod touch as standard, although there is still no built-in chat client or wireless music streaming. Although all of these features probably should have been in right from the start, the addition of e-mail marks a shift in treating the iPod touch device as merely another portable music player to a more fully fledged digital wireless platform—a change that will become even more apparent once the full software development kit is released later this year. No doubt we will see a veritable plethora of new wireless and media applications from third-party developers in the not too distant future. With the iPod touch and iPhone both being Mac OS X based, this should open up a whole new range of possibilities, both on the software side and for new hardware form factors, such as a large screen portable media player and/or tablet based computer based upon similar technology to the existing iPhone. All of which makes the iPod touch and iPhone suddenly look a lot more interesting…

At this point, I should also put in a small mention for the iPod classic, which I finally decided to plump for while I wait (probably a long time!) for a low-cost, high-capacity, 3G pay-as-you-go version of the iPhone. Despite a corrupt hard disk that initially caused it to lock up every few minutes after syncing it with iTunes, a quick call to Apple technical support sorted that out and I was able to transfer all my music and photos to it without any problems. Although the sound quality is nothing to write home about, especially when played via the supplied earbud-style headphones, I love being able to hold my entire music collection in the palm of my hand, and find the iPod particularly good for watching TV shows that I’ve recorded on my computer via a USB digital tuner. Unfortunately, this currently requires converting and copying the files to my iTunes library, which is a pain and quite time consuming, but other than that I’m very happy with it. I even managed to pick up an iPod connection kit including dock, remote control, cables and power supply for a measly £35 in the January sales at Argos, which is great for watching QuickTime content on a TV or playback via a stereo. (Apple TV? Who needs it!)

Finally, of course, there was the recent announcement of the much anticipated MacBook Air. To some, an underpowered, overpriced piece of eye-candy, to others, a must-have piece of portable computing heaven. Whilst I have my reservations about the very deliberate trade-offs of the MacBook Air design (I would have much rather seen a smaller and thicker sub-notebook form factor with a low voltage CPU and longer battery life) there’s no doubt that it has the unmistakable wow-factor that has long been missing from the laptop market, pretty much ever since Apple released the original titanium PowerBook. With the MacBook Air, Apple has once again raised the bar on what portable computers should look and feel like, and I look forward to seeing where they take the design concept in the years ahead. Will we see sleeker, more curvaceous versions of other members of the MacBook family, replete with speedy SSD drives, or will the Air continue to be in a class of its own? Who knows, but there will always be a market for aspirational high-end laptops, even if they don’t sell the same bucketloads as the existing MacBook and MacBook Pros models (although time will tell). By the way, is it just me, or does the MacBook Air’s screen look really goofy with that wide border around it? Not that it stops me wanting one, although I can’t even remotely justify and/or afford it!

All of which brings me to the question that I originally wanted to raise in this blog: exactly who is the MacBook Air targeted at? Given the number of people who claim that they would never buy one because it’s too expensive, lacks a built-in optical drive, Ethernet port, etc. etc. (actually, I think they’re all lying and overcome with jealousy!), you’d be forgiven for thinking that Apple have designed an incredibly beautiful and slimline white elephant, rather than a commercially successful laptop. My own suspicion is that the market that Apple have deliberately targeted the Air at is the executive user or travelling businessperson. Companies often design a product around one particular user profile, which results in a more streamlined and successful design, rather than a failed attempt to please everybody, and when you think of it, the Air is just the ticket for the busy executive out on the road who wants a flash and lightweight laptop capable of reading e-mail, web browsing, running MS Office, PowerPoint presentations, and not much else. Not that the MacBook Air isn’t capable of anything else, of course, but this isn’t a market where raw processor power is the main issue, unlike, say, music production, video editing or gaming, where every CPU cycle counts. Moreover, the relatively high cost of the Air, whilst prohibitive for many users, is less of an issue for a style-conscious executive or member of the board, who would be more likely to buy an aspirational laptop than a good value for money workhorse. Of course, the MacBook Air will (and does) appeal to many of the rest of us, but it all just seems too good a fit to be coincidental…

What’s interesting about this suggestion is not what it means for Apple’s laptop sales, but for its uptake in the business sector, which at present is very much dominated by Windows PCs (even more so than the home market). Many corporate IT departments are wary of embracing new computer platforms as it makes their jobs all the more difficult, but (and this is my theory) if Apple is able to infiltrate such companies from the top down, as it were, such departments will have no choice but to improve their support for Mac products. I mean, they can hardly say no the CEO asking them to set up e-mail for his brand new MacBook Air, can they? It could just cost them their job. In short, I think that the MacBook Air is (if you’ll forgive the obvious metaphor) a wedge into the corporate market, upon the back of which Apple hopes to boost its acceptability in the business sector generally. The styling of the machine is, like the new iMacs, designed to appeal to the more seriously minded user, unlike the previous generations of iMac that always had a slightly toy-like feel with all that glossy white plastic—friendly but not quite right for the office. With the MacBook Air and aluminium iMac, there’s no mistaking it: this computer means business, and you can take that as literally as you like. The same is true of OS X Leopard, which has undergone a minor makeover that arguably makes it a little more lean, mean and businesslike—or, to coin a phrase, no more Mister nice computer.

So, do any of the above developments show that Apple has lost touch with its user base? Quite the opposite. I think that Apple has been listening very careful to what both existing and potential users have been telling it, which has been “movies”, “mail” and “mobile productivity”, respectively. Of course the MacBook Air isn’t everybody’s cup of tea, but that’s precisely the point. It’s designed to do a particular job very, very well, and if it succeeds in that, then it might just transform the way that many businesses see the Macintosh platform for good; i.e. the Mac will finally become accepted in the workplace. In the meantime, we can look forward to seeing some exciting media based products based on the mobile OS X development platform real soon now, and there are no doubt future developments with touch-screens and new form factors in the works as we speak. It’s going to be another interesting year for Apple watchers everywhere…